From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG  Tue Jun  9 07:45:07 2009
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: current@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6A4CD1065673;
	Tue,  9 Jun 2009 07:45:07 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from bzeeb-lists@lists.zabbadoz.net)
Received: from mail.cksoft.de (mail.cksoft.de [195.88.108.3])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1CF1D8FC14;
	Tue,  9 Jun 2009 07:45:07 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from bzeeb-lists@lists.zabbadoz.net)
Received: from localhost (amavis.fra.cksoft.de [192.168.74.71])
	by mail.cksoft.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id C7BFD41C729;
	Tue,  9 Jun 2009 09:45:05 +0200 (CEST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at cksoft.de
Received: from mail.cksoft.de ([195.88.108.3])
	by localhost (amavis.fra.cksoft.de [192.168.74.71]) (amavisd-new,
	port 10024)
	with ESMTP id ZPmTa2SEGpxX; Tue,  9 Jun 2009 09:45:05 +0200 (CEST)
Received: by mail.cksoft.de (Postfix, from userid 66)
	id 696B041C71D; Tue,  9 Jun 2009 09:45:05 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from maildrop.int.zabbadoz.net (maildrop.int.zabbadoz.net
	[10.111.66.10])
	(using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
	(No client certificate requested)
	by mail.int.zabbadoz.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 89B1C4448E6;
	Tue,  9 Jun 2009 07:42:25 +0000 (UTC)
Date: Tue, 9 Jun 2009 07:42:24 +0000 (UTC)
From: "Bjoern A. Zeeb" <bzeeb-lists@lists.zabbadoz.net>
X-X-Sender: bz@maildrop.int.zabbadoz.net
To: d@delphij.net
In-Reply-To: <4A2E0D12.40101@delphij.net>
Message-ID: <20090609074144.O22887@maildrop.int.zabbadoz.net>
References: <20090608224516.547F17302F@freebsd-current.sentex.ca>
	<4A2DA390.3090704@delphij.net>
	<pnDviOUhM/SNuybQq0u/UHsbVeU@j4OYE6OL8eALCd4BvSxIfwgoxSc>
	<E1MDvQt-000CEr-B0@kabab.cs.huji.ac.il> <4A2E0D12.40101@delphij.net>
X-OpenPGP-Key: 0x14003F198FEFA3E77207EE8D2B58B8F83CCF1842
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
Cc: Hiroki Sato <hrs@FreeBSD.org>, rea-fbsd@codelabs.ru,
	FreeBSD Current <current@freebsd.org>, net@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: [head tinderbox] failure on sparc64/sparc64
X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current
	<freebsd-current.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>, 
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-current@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 09 Jun 2009 07:45:07 -0000

On Tue, 9 Jun 2009, Xin LI wrote:

> Danny Braniss wrote:
>>> Xin, good day.
>>>
>>> Mon, Jun 08, 2009 at 04:49:36PM -0700, Xin LI wrote:
>>>> The attached patch should fix this, any objections?
>>> Yes, you missed negation operator in the copyin check.  The issue
>>> was already fixed by hrs@ two hours ago:
>>>   http://svn.freebsd.org/viewvc/base?view=revision&revision=193796
>> sorry to barge in, but:
>>            if ((options | GIF_FULLOPTS) == GIF_FULLOPTS)
>> is not clear,
>> 	   if ((options & ~GIF_FULLOPTS) == 0)
>> seems to be less offuscated or I'm missing something?
>
> Yes this looks like the usually used idiom (perhaps more efficient
> anyway)...  I just kept the style consistent with the old code.
> Hiroki-san, could you have a look at this and consider if we should use
> this idiom?

Also see the mail I had sent in reply to the commit message yesterday.

/bz

-- 
Bjoern A. Zeeb                      The greatest risk is not taking one.